L AW O FFICES 

# G AROFALO 

# G OERLICH 

# H AINBACH PC

1200 N EW H AMPSHIRE A VENUE NW

· S UITE 590

· W ASHINGTON DC 20036-6802

T ELEPHONE 202 776-3970

· F ACSIMILE 202 776-3975

WWW

. GGH

- AIRLAW

. COM

December 2, 2016

VIA FDMS

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of the Chief Counsel Office of Rulemakings 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591

Re: Petition of Southern Air fo r Renewal of Exemption No. 9845C;

Docket No. FAA-2004-19718

Ladies/Gentlemen:

Southern Air Inc. (Southern), pursuant to Section 11.61 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, petitions for renewal of Ex emption No. 9845C granting relief from FAR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) to permit Southern to continue to substitute a qualified, authorized company check airman in place of a Federal Aviation Administration inspector to observe a qualifying pilot-in-command (PIC) while that PIC performs prescribed duties du ring at least one flight that includes a takeoff and landing, when completing initi al or upgrade training as specified in FAR 121.424. FAA initially granted Southern an exemption from FAR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) on December 29, 2004 (Exemption No. 8464) and contin ually has renewed or reissued that exemption, most recently as Exemption No. 9845C on January 21, 2015. By its terms Exemption No. 9845C (copy enclosed) expires Marc h 31, 2017. Southern requests that a further renewal be granted prior to that date and remain effective for at least two years.

Justification for renewal of Exemption N o. 9845C is the same as for the original Exemption No. 8464 issued to Southern on December 29, 2004. In granting Exemption No. 8464, FAA determined that relief was in the pub lic interest inasmuch as it would reduce “unnecessary costs that may influence the price of services to the public” and would “improve the airline’s ability to provide on-time, depend able air service.” Exem ption No. 8464, pp. 1-2. FAA further stated that such an exemption wo uld not adversely affect safety, provided that Southern complied with certain conditions and limitations.

Southern submits that the circumstances stated in its initial petition for exemption in this docket are unchanged and that Southern has remained in compliance with all exemption

# G AROFALO 

# G OERLICH 

# H AINBACH PC

Federal Aviation Administration December 2, 2016 Page 2

conditions and limitations. 1 Southern submits that exemptio n relief from FAR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) continues to be in the public interest and to ha ve no adverse effect upon safety, as previously determined by the FAA.

Southern submits that a summary of this petition need not be published in the Federal Register as the relief requested is identical to numerous exemptions granted previously, and granting this petition would not set a precedent. See FAR 11.87. FAA renewal of Southern’s exemption also would be consistent with routine renewals of similar exemptions. See, e.g., Exemption No. 6473I granted to Federal Expr ess Corporation, Docket No. FAA-2002-12343 and Exemption 9755D granted to Alaska Ai rlines, Inc., Docket No. FAA-2006-24996.

Thank you for your time and attention. If th ere are any questions, please feel free to

contact us.

Sincerely,

Aaron A. Goerlich

Jason E. Maddux

G AROFALO G OERLICH H AINBACH PC

Counsel for Southern Air Inc.

Enclosure

1 In granting Exemption No. 8464A on December 29, 2006, FAA removed as unnecessary the condition in Exemption No. 8464 that Southern, as di stinguished from the FAA, could conduct no more than 50 percent of the operating experience observati ons during any six-month period. Southern requests that the renewal requested here continue to not include this condition, which remains unnecessary.